In the past two months, Microsoft and Google have been bickering over one central issue: HTML5. The Verge has learned that Google is forcing Microsoft to build its YouTube Windows Phone app in HTML5, despite its own Android and iOS versions using superior native code. Although Microsoft has offered to build ad support along with making other tweaks as Google has requested, a full HTML5 app isn't currently possible on the platform.

The difficult thing here is that Google actually has a very good case; it's their API, their service, their rules. On top of that, YouTube publishers - big and small - need to earn money from advertisements too, and incorrect implementations make that harder. Microsoft's mafia practices regarding patents, extorting companies to pay for Android use even though Microsoft has contributed zero code to Android plays a role too. Lastly, Windows Phone is essentially irrelevant with 3% market share - it's not as if Microsoft ever concerned itself with minority platforms.

Still, all this does is hurt consumers, no matter how few Windows Phone users there are. Just work this out, please, you bunch of children.

Private API permission is outside of the discussions on the terms of service of a Public API

Exactly not. The youtube terms are clear what API's are allowed, what a client can and cannot do. There is even a link to the youtube API pages at the very first sentence and the whoke first chapter is about "API usage". Read it.

In order to get access to Google's Private APIs, you need to negotiate with Google

Google is a company. Pay enough and you can buy youtube, change the ToS or get special deals.

which may

The PUBLIC youtube ToS and APIs, those everyone can use under the same conditions, are visible, clear, public, not private since a long time. A user of the free (as in no money) youtube-services needs to fulfit those. There is no excuse. Take it or leave. Point.

IF Microsoft got into secret negotiations with Google to bypass some of those conditions and IF Google sayed okay but we request you do use HTML5 (all your speculation) then .... then what Microsoft complains about here? That they can't get things for free others never got? That they can't bypass, no dicatete, the rules (that apply to all others too, not only to Microsoft) when using services of others?

I think you may have a point in that Microsoft's actual complain is that they got the same conditions, the same API everybody else has. And WHEN (speculation of yours again) Microsoft got into secret negotiations to get another deal then its a complain that they don't get them for free.

Exactly not. The youtube terms are very clear what API's are allowed. There is even a link to the youtube API pages at the very first sentence.

Right, but the goal isn't to stay within the confines of the public API. Its to get access to the private API. That requires negotiation, and thus isn't governed by the constraints of the public facing API's TOS.

This means that HTML5 being mentioned or not mentioned in the TOS is irrelevant, as it may have been a stipulation from Google to gain private API access.

Its a company. Pay enough and you can buy youtube, change the ToS or do whatever you like.

What?

IF Microsoft got into secret negotiations with Google to bypass some of those conditions and IF Google sayed okay but we request you do use HTML5 then .... then what Microsoft complains about here? That they can't get things for free others never got?

Precisely. Microsoft wants level footing with other platforms. Not to be trapped inside of the ToS confines of a public API which is more of a content aggregation plaything than a usable API.

This is a negotiation. There's push and pull from both sides. Microsoft is taking their complaints public because its waging a PR war, they know what they're doing.

be trapped inside of the ToS confines of a public API which is more of a content aggregation plaything than a usable API

You never wrote a youtube app or even looked at the API then. I think what you liked to say but omitted is that Microsoft offered MORE then youtube at Android and youtube at iPhone offer, much more. Access to content marked private, downloading of videos, no ads. Something Google CANNOT grant official access to (removing ads may get in conflict with %-revenue deals) even in secret negotiations cause, you know, there are deals between content-providers and youtube in place. Contracts, laws, lawyers, expensive, etc. Youtube even NEEDS to block that Microsoft app else they not only lose revenue but may get sued in court by content-owners cause of contract-violations.

Microsoft is taking their complaints public because its waging a PR war, they know what they're doing.

And while Microsoft wents on some obscure PR wars for unknown reasons (hunting for weapons of mass destruction?) WP-users suffer and have no youtube. Clever. Latest now I would switch to something else. Who needs to buy products from a company that drags you into there obscure PR wars so you suffer?